11.18.05

While it was kicked off by Murtha, both sides on the “pull out of Iraq” debate continue to annoy me.Â This was probably spawned by some talkback radio idiocy on KDKA this afternoon, but itâ€™s been bouncing around in the back of my mind for a while.

On the right, we have the dumbasses who can’t tell the difference between a withdrawal and surrender.Â Surrender implies meeting some sort of terms and actually being defeated – neither of which is the case.Â Withdrawal is a slow and staged process of removing yourself in a calm and coordinated manner.Â After all, we managed to withdraw after Desert Storm and I’ve yet to see anyone suggest that we surrendered to Saddam in ’91.

On the left, we have dipshits who still persist in the “Bush lied, people died” bullshit.Â That’s been done to death so many times it’s just stupid to hear it over again.Â While I happen to disagree with his reaction to the intel, the fact is the intel was flawed.Â Seriously flawed.

Then we have the retards on the right who claim that criticism of a President is anti-American.Â Sorry – but that’s plain wrong.Â Exercising freedom of speech is absolutely American and should be cherished, even if they are being idiots in their suggestions.Â Questioning someone’s patriotism when they simply have alternate political views is about as anti-American as you can get.

And lastly we have the numbnuts on the left who think “withdrawal” means “get the hell out tomorrow”.Â Sorry – but that really is a stupid idea.Â Power vacuums lead to bad governments.Â You *have* to pull out in an organized and gradual fashion.

Yes, it’s time to leave.Â Yes, Iraqis don’t want Americans there any more.Â No, we can’t and shouldn’t do it quickly.